The administration and their minions have been assiduous Fudd-fluffers ever since Sandy Hook, furiously trying to recruit anyone who calls himself a hunter to their side of the gun control debate. It’s been a desperate attempt to get someone — anyone — in the gun-owning community to sign onto their magazine-limiting, AR-banning agenda. And to hear “Double Barrel” Joe Biden and others tell it, hunters are mostly good with Barack’s civilian disarmament push — as long as it doesn’t affect their bolt action rifles and double-barrelled smooth bores. Unfortunately, some of that actually turned out to be a big fetid pile of manufactured moose dung. Whatever the cause, though, the public seems to be very much on board with hunting. Still. At least, that’s what the latest National Shooting Sports Foundation survey says . . .
NEWTOWN, Conn. — The National Shooting Sports Foundation reports that a new survey shows 79 percent of the American public approve of hunting. This marks the highest level of support for hunting since 1995, according to data compiled by Responsive Management, an independent research firm.
The nationwide scientific survey showed the public’s approval of hunting rose five points in the past year, up from 74 percent in 2011. The survey, conducted in February 2013 using random digit dialing and supplemental cellular telephone sampling, was the fifth in a series of similar surveys by Responsive Management to track trends in public approval of hunting since 1995.
Support for hunting has remained generally consistent during this time–73 percent in 1995; 75 percent in 2003; 78 percent in 2006; 74 percent in 2011; and a peak of 79 percent in 2013.
Mark Damian Duda, executive director of Responsive Management, is still looking at survey results to better understand why approval has increased. Said Duda, “Approval of hunting among Americans is fairly stable and bounces between 73 and 79 percent. The reasons for this increase are still unclear, but it is probably related to the increase in hunting and shooting participation.
Added Duda, “Since 2006, hunting participation has increased by 9 percent while shooting participation has increased 18 percent since 2009. Other studies we have conducted on public opinion on hunting show that the strongest correlation for approval of hunting is knowing a hunter–over and above demographic variables or anything else. With the increased number of hunters in the field and sport shooters at the range, it is possible that this is being reflected in this uptick in support for hunting.”
One thousand Americans 18 years old and older were surveyed to achieve a sampling error of plus or minus 3.00 percentage points. More than half (52%) of those surveyed strongly approved of hunting. At the other end of the spectrum, 12 percent of Americans disapprove of hunting. Another 8 percent neither approve nor disapprove (total does not equal 100% due to rounding).
Responsive Management specializes in public opinion research on natural resource and outdoor recreation issues.
“Fudd-fluffer”? Jesus, I didn’t need that visual.
This thread gave us “Fudd-Fluffer,”and a comment on another thread gave us “mistaking coffins for soap boxes.” It’s a good night to steal quotes.
So what’s what “wascawy” means…
Ah, hunters. With friends like them, who needs enemies?
Not surprising, since suburban America is hip-deep in pet-eating coyotes and garden-destroying deer, and rural America is wading through feral hog dung. I expect that we’ll soon be seeing signs in backyards all over the country that say “Hunters Welcome. Please shoot something.”
I would seriously love to see signs in people’s yards inviting hunters — it’s really tough getting permission to hunt on private property.
Ironic, is it not, that the one gun control measure they have any hope for, background checks, is the one that most aligns the Fudds with the Mall Ninjas?
I often get asked why I have guns yet don’t hunt.
This disappoints me so.
There is so much more to guns than hunting, and so much more to hunting than guns.
yay. the most meaningless chart i’ve seen all year.
No more details about the survey, like the total respondents?
A lot of the surveys the pollers published seem to ask just a few hundred people. Is that enough to have confidence in, if that was the case here?
As long as it’s really random, a few hundred is fine.
The first line of the last paragraph states, “One thousand Americans 18 years old and older were surveyed …”
One thousand people is not a very large sample. I am absolutely certain that you could get on the order of 5% to 10% variation in results between any given sample of 1000 people. So, in my opinion, this survey doesn’t really allow anyone to say that public approval of hunting is at a high (whether short term or long term). That’s my two cents.
Not shocked. I wonder if the antis really understand that by separating out hunting as the “good 2A”, they were promoting hunting’s legitimacy?